评论
打印
The American system, really in a lot of ways, discourages participation.
从很多方面来看，美国的选举系统都在打消选民们参与的热情。
Elections for Congress in the United States are based on a plurality winner system
美国国会选举制度是建立在多数制基础上的。
where you live in one district, candidates from two or more parties go run in that district, and then whoever gets the most votes wins.
在这种制度下，选民所在地区的两个或多个候选政党进行竞争，谁的支持率最高谁就在选举中胜出。
Right now many of our maps are incredibly disproportional
现在，很多州的选票比例都严重失衡，
and in a state like North Carolina, Democrats got 47% of the vote, but Republicans have over two-thirds of the seats.
比如在北卡罗来纳州，明明民主党赢了47%的选票，共和党却占了该州议会三分之二的席位。
Meanwhile most of us end up living in congressional districts that aren't competitive where often the opposition party doesn't run a candidate at all.
此外，我们大多数人所在的国会选取都缺乏竞争力，反对党连一个候选人也没有。
We end up focusing on a handful of swing seats that happen to be narrowly balanced.
最后，各党派都把注意力集中在了几个碰巧勉强平衡但极具竞争力的席位上。
There's a very strong incentive to vote for one of the two major parties because people don't want to waste their vote by supporting a third party with no chance of winning.
选民会强烈倾向于投票支持民主党和共和党这两个主要的政党，因为他们不想把选票浪费在其他那些毫无指望的政党上。
When you have 330 million people and two parties trying to represent them, lots of people inevitably are gonna feel left out.
当一个州有3300人口，要代表他们的政党却只有两个时，很多人就不可避免地会觉得自己被忽视了。
You have incredible levels now in the United States of dissatisfaction with the political parties.
如今，美国民众对各个政党都相当不满意。
Americans should think more seriously about switching from our current electoral system
我们真的的应该认真考虑淘汰我们当前的选举制度，
to one of any number of more proportional alternatives that could solve a lot of problems that exist in American voting today.
采用其他比例更均衡的选举制度，无论哪一种，都能够解决我们当下选举制度的很多问题。
In a party list system, it's very simple.
比例代表值的逻辑就很简单。
Everybody in the state, they would go to the voting booth and they would vote for a party that they like best.
州内所有成员都到投票箱前投票支持他们最喜欢的政党。
And then at the end we would see how many votes did each party get
接下来统计各个政党的支持率，
and if you got 25 or 30 or 40 percent of the vote that's how many seats you would get.
不管你的支持率是25,%，30%还是40%，投票支持率是多少，就在议会中获得多少席位。
And then the seats would be filled by just sort of running down a list that party leaders had made for themselves.
这些席位就由各党选出的领导人按优先次序担任。
Israel, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Germany and New Zealand all used variations on this system
以色列、芬兰、挪威、瑞典、德国和新西兰采用的选举制度都跟这一制度大同小异，
and as a result, voters have lots of choices when it comes to finding a party that represents their interests.
这样一来，选民们就有了更多的选择空间，因而总能选出最能代表他们利益的政党，
And voter turnout in these countries is much higher than in the United States.
这些国家的投票率也比美国高出不少。
Another popular system is called an alternative vote system.
另一种比较受欢迎的选举制度叫“备择性选举”。
You show up and you have to rank a whole bunch of candidates in order of preference.
选民需要按优先选择次序列出几个候选人。
A constituency will elect a whole bunch of different members as individuals.
选民们会选出一个个议员代表。
But it's still gonna work out that if 40% of people were for Democrats, they'll end up with 40% of the seats.
最后还是按照比例来分配议会席位，比如民主党总支持率为40%，就获得40%的议会席位。
This is how legislators get elected in Australia and Ireland and there too you see lots of political parties.
澳大利亚和爱尔兰的议员就是通过这种方式选举出来的，这两个国家的党派也呈百花齐放之势。
In the American system, a loss is a loss.
而在美国的选举制度下，选举失败低就意味着没有席位。
So Republicans don't really put resources into House races in Massachusetts and Democrats pretty much ignore a place like Alabama.
所以，共和党不怎么会把精力放在马萨诸塞州，民主党则基本上忽视亚拉巴马州之类的地方。
But in a proportional system, both parties would need to fight everywhere.
但在比例代表制下，两党就需要努力争取每个地方。
Then they would need to try to engage citizens everywhere.
这样一来，他们就得努力调动每个地方的选民。
There's no constitutional requirement in the United States that everybody use this district based system.
美国宪法没有规定大家都必须使用这种以选区为基础的选举制度。
Most states could adopt elements of a proportional system if they wanted to.
只要他们愿意，大多数选区都可以借鉴比例选举制的优点。
Sure, the connection between a specific place and a specific legislator would weaken a bit.
没错，比例选举制下某个具体的议员和他的选取之间的联系可能不那么紧密。
But it would also solve the problems of gerrymandered districts and break the two-party hold on our political system.
但这种制度可以解决改划选区的问题，打破民共两党一直把持政体的局面。
You would get a wider range of views represented. You would get a wider range of talents involved in the system.
也能听取更多选民的意见，吸收更多人才，
And you have more people feeling that they're represented.
还能让更多人感到自己没有被忽略。
